"You know, people ask me what keeps me up at night. And the thing that keeps me up at night is just what you brought up, pandemic flu. So I think it’s very possible. And we’re at risk for another pandemic. Our best preparation for that pandemic is to optimize our response to seasonal flu… But, John, I think that is, you know, remains a serious possibility." - Former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield1
BLUF: The propaganda machine regarding Bird Flu has recently been ratcheted up. Does this mean Bird Flu is the next planned pandemic? Is this political theater regarding a pending WHO vote? Perhaps both ideas converge to remind the public and policy makers to remain fearful.
Introduction:
In recent years, the discourse surrounding avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu, has surged to the forefront of public attention. With a steady increase in the number of articles, warnings, and governmental responses, the global community has been forced to confront the looming threat posed by those attempting to sell a narrative of a novel infectious disease. From the culling of tens of millions of birds to the allocation of substantial funds towards vaccine research, the urgency to ‘contain and mitigate’ the spread of avian flu has never been more pronounced. Never before has the narrative been so blatant, and the science so obscured.
Amidst these efforts lies a shadowy narrative that captivates those inclined towards conspiracy theories. As individuals delve deeper into the motives behind governmental responses, the flow of funding, patents, and legislative amendments, a solid sense of skepticism emerges. This conspiratorial lens prompts a critical examination of mainstream media narratives, leading to questions about the true intentions driving these actions.
The convergence of these events prompts a broader inquiry into the future of ‘pandemics' and the world's response to them. When will the next ‘pandemic' strike? What would be the likely response, and what would be their expected outcomes? These questions linger, demanding deeper exploration into the complex interplay of motives, funding streams, and political agendas that shape our understanding of forced global health crises. This article seeks to answer some of these questions.
Official Origins & Narrative:
The discovery of avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu, dates back to the early 20th century. The first documented case of avian influenza occurred in Italy in 1878, where a severe outbreak in domesticated birds was recorded. However, it wasn't until the early 1930s that researchers made significant strides in understanding this viral infection.
In 1931, Dr. Richard Shope, a renowned American virologist, isolated the first known influenza A virus from a pig. This groundbreaking discovery marked a pivotal moment in influenza research, laying the foundation for further investigations into the virus's transmission and impact on both animal and human health.
[Analyst note: Dr. Richard Shops worked for the Rockefeller Institute. During World War I, the Rockefeller Foundation played a significant role in medical research and public health initiatives (and still does to this day). The foundation provided funding for various projects, including the establishment of the International Health Division, which aimed to combat infectious diseases worldwide.
More interestingly, the inability of modern technology to identify the lethal influenza strain of the Spanish Flu pandemic stems from the fact that influenza was not the primary cause of death. An estimated 95% or more of the fatalities resulted from bacterial pneumonia rather than an influenza virus. Additionally, the outbreak was not exclusive to Spain; the first cases of bacterial pneumonia in 1918 originated in military bases, starting with Fort Riley, Kansas. Notably, between January 21 and June 4, 1918, soldiers at Fort Riley were administered an experimental bacterial meningitis vaccine derived from horse cultures by the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in New York, and administered by Dr Frederick L Gates..23456]
Throughout the 20th century, avian influenza primarily affected domestic poultry, including chickens and turkeys. It wasn't until the late 1990s that the virus gained widespread attention due to its potential to infect humans. The first documented case of avian influenza A(H5N1) virus transmission to humans occurred in Hong Kong in 1997, resulting in six deaths.
The mutation rate of the bird flu virus has been a subject of extensive research and surveillance efforts. Influenza viruses, including avian influenza, are known for their high mutation rates, primarily due to the error-prone nature of their RNA replication process. These mutations can lead to changes in viral proteins, potentially altering the virus's transmissibility, virulence, and ability to evade the immune system.
Avian influenza is primarily transmitted through direct contact with infected birds or their droppings, feathers, or respiratory secretions. However, certain strains of avian influenza, particularly those with pandemic potential, can also be transmitted from birds to humans through close contact or exposure to contaminated environments.
The biggest meat companies would love to consolidate their control of the food system by getting rid of the last remaining independent family farmers. The World Economic Forum, the billionaires and the biotech companies would love to replace real farms with fake food. - Alexis Baden-Mayer, Expose News7
For the first hundred years following its discovery, avian influenza primarily infected avian species, including domestic poultry such as chickens, turkeys, and ducks. While sporadic cases of avian influenza transmission to humans occurred, they were relatively rare and typically associated with close contact with infected birds.
However, the emergence of highly pathogenic avian influenza strains, such as H5N1 and H7N9, in the late 20th and early 21st centuries raised concerns about the virus's potential to cause severe illness and mortality in both birds and humans. These strains have led to large-scale outbreaks in poultry populations and sporadic cases of human infection, highlighting the ongoing threat posed by avian influenza to global health security.
[Analyst note: it is important to understand the mainstream narrative, as this is the psyop, the lie, that will be used to sell the world on the mass culling of animals, and could be used as an excuse for the next ‘pandemic.’]
A Shifting Narrative:
The rapid mutations observed in bird flu strains over the past four years have raised questions about the virus's ability to infect a broad variety of animals across diverse geographical domains. While influenza viruses are known for their propensity to mutate, the extent and speed of these mutations in recent outbreaks have stretched the credibility of scientific understanding to extreme limits.
Mainstream media articles have reported instances of bird flu infections in a wide range of animal species, including chickens, turkeys, ducks, wild birds, peregrine falcons, red-tailed hawks, penguins, sea lions, cows, pigs, dogs, cats, foxes, bears, skunks, mountain lions, bottle-nosed dolphins, and other wildlife, in addition to humans. This breadth of hosts is unprecedented and suggests a remarkable adaptability of the virus to diverse environmental conditions and host species, or a purposefully crafted narrative for a profit-driven set of agendas.
The sheer number and variety of successful mutations required for bird flu to infect such a broad spectrum of animals in such a short time-frame raise questions about the evolutionary mechanisms at play. For a virus to not only infect but also successfully propagate within different animal hosts, it must acquire mutations that confer not only infectivity but also the ability to survive in varied environments, including marine, Arctic, UV-exposed, and extreme heat conditions. The odds of this become exponentially smaller when factoring in all the necessary conditions that need to be met.
The implications of these mutations extend beyond the realm of public health to impact the global meat industry significantly. The widespread infections observed in cattle, pigs, and poultry have disrupted meat, dairy, and egg production on an unprecedented scale. This disruption aligns with certain globalist agendas promoting vegetarian and insect-based diets, as well as the massive funding of meat alternatives by organizations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Moreover, the potential for future vaccine development and deployment presents another layer of concern. Given the financial interests of organizations like the Gates Foundation in both vaccine development and alternative protein sources, questions about conflicts of interest and the prioritization of profit over public health emerge.
As one navigate the complexities of this evolving landscape, it is essential to remain vigilant and critically evaluate the motives and agendas driving responses to global health crises.
[Analyst note: The documentary "Beyond Impossible — The Truth Behind the Fake Meat Industry" challenges the health benefits and environmental claims of lab-grown meats. It argues that these ultraprocessed foods lack essential nutrients found in natural meats and have greater greenhouse gas emissions than traditional livestock practices. Depression, anxiety disorders, metabolic dysfunction, cancer, cardiovascular issues, and gastrointestinal problems were among the health risks associated with ultraprocessed food consumption.
The film advocates for regenerative farming methods as a more sustainable alternative and critiques global policies promoting meat alternatives, suggesting potential risks to both food security and individual health.89]
The Fallacy in (PCR) Testing:
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) testing revolutionized molecular biology and diagnostics since its invention by Kary Mullis in the 1980s. Initially, PCR was developed as a technique to amplify specific DNA sequences for various research purposes. However, its application expanded to include medical diagnostics, particularly in detecting viruses like HIV, hepatitis, and more recently, SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19.
[Analyst note: Judy Mikovits, a polarizing figure in virology, has made claims challenging established views on diseases such as AIDS. She has suggested that HIV does not cause AIDS and has linked what she terms the "AIDS Plandemic" to a hepatitis B vaccine.
Mikovits has been vocal about what she perceives as the destruction of her career by figures like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins. She has alleged that individuals like Magic Johnson and other NBA players were exposed to HIV through a contaminated hepatitis B vaccine. Mikovits gained widespread attention for her involvement in the controversial COVID-19 conspiracy film "Plandemic."10111213]
Kary Mullis, the inventor of PCR, expressed skepticism about the use of PCR testing for diagnostic purposes, particularly for viral infections. He argued that PCR was designed to amplify DNA sequences and not to diagnose infectious diseases. Mullis believed that PCR could detect the presence of viral genetic material, but it couldn't distinguish between live viruses capable of causing illness and inactive or harmless viral fragments.
[Analyst note: Kary Mullis, known for his groundbreaking work in molecular biology with the invention of PCR, held controversial views on several scientific matters. He expressed skepticism regarding the extent to which human activity contributes to climate change, a stance that set him apart from mainstream scientific consensus. Additionally, Mullis questioned the established link between HIV and AIDS, further distancing himself from prevailing scientific understanding. Mullis passed away on August 7, 2019, at his home in Newport Beach, California, due to complications from pneumonia. His death has sparked speculation due to his contentious opinions and outspoken nature, particularly given its proximity to the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic.14151617]
PCR testing's original intent was to amplify and detect specific DNA sequences, making it invaluable for genetic research, forensic analysis, and medical diagnostics. In medical diagnostics, PCR allows for the detection of viral RNA or DNA in patient samples, aiding in the diagnosis of viral infections with high sensitivity and specificity.
However, concerns have been raised about the potential for false positives in PCR testing, especially when the cycle threshold (cT) values are set too high. The cycle threshold refers to the number of amplification cycles required for the PCR test to detect the target genetic material. Running PCR tests at high cycle thresholds can increase the sensitivity of the test but may also amplify background noise and non-infectious viral fragments, leading to false-positive results.
False positives can have significant consequences, including unnecessary quarantine measures, treatment, and public health interventions. Additionally, false-positive results can erode public trust in testing programs and undermine efforts to control infectious diseases.
The issue of false positives in PCR testing gained particular attention during the COVID-19 pandemic, where high cT values were sometimes used, leading to concerns about overestimating the prevalence of the virus in certain populations. Some experts argued for the need to carefully interpret PCR results, considering clinical context, symptomatology, and epidemiological factors to minimize the risk of false positives.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, PCR testing emerged as the predominant method for diagnosing the virus, notably becoming the "Gold Standard." This shift occurred partly due to the withdrawal of funding from the World Health Organization (WHO) by the United States under the Trump administration. In the absence of sufficient government support, private philanthropic organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation stepped in, filling funding gaps and exerting considerable influence on global health initiatives. As a result, PCR testing, supported by these philanthropic groups, gained prominence over previous methods such as symptom assessment and antigen tests.
An unusual aspect of this transition was the withholding of cycle threshold (cT) values from medical professionals, a departure from past practices. Typically, cT values provide crucial information about the viral load in a patient's sample and aid in interpreting test results. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, this information was often not disclosed, leading to an unprecedented number of "asymptomatic" diagnoses. This lack of transparency raised concerns about the accuracy of PCR testing results and the potential misclassification of individuals as asymptomatic carriers. Overall, the convergence of factors such as changes in funding dynamics, the influence of private philanthropy, and the withholding of critical testing information contributed to the widespread adoption of PCR testing and its associated implications during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Currently, PCR testing has become the "Gold Standard" for detecting Bird Flu in poultry and cattle. These tests are typically conducted in private laboratories, often on individual animals. Similar to human testing during the COVID-19 pandemic, the cycle threshold (cT) values are frequently not disclosed in these animal tests. This lack of transparency is significant because cT values serve as a crucial metric for assessing the viral load in the sample.
In the context of bird flu outbreaks, the absence of cT values can have profound implications, particularly concerning the culling of infected animals. Without this information, decisions to cull tens of millions of animals may be made based solely on the presence of viral genetic material detected by PCR testing, rather than on the actual viral load and contagiousness of the animals. This approach raises ethical concerns about the necessity and proportionality of mass culling measures, as well as the potential economic and environmental impacts.
Furthermore, the reliance on PCR testing without disclosing cT values may lead to inaccuracies in assessing the true extent of the outbreak and implementing effective control measures. Transparency in testing protocols and the disclosure of cT values are essential for ensuring the accuracy and validity of testing results, as well as for making informed decisions regarding disease management strategies in the livestock industry.
Financial Backers and Drivers:
Multiple entities seem to have a financially vested interest in Bird Flu, spanning various sectors such as pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, agriculture, and alternative food industries. These interests extend to the development and distribution of vaccines, therapeutics, and alternative meat and dairy products. Additionally, the control over certain markets and potentially even people's behavior may be at stake, given the potential economic ramifications of bird flu ‘outbreaks’ and the demand for ‘solutions’ to mitigate their impact. This complex interplay will be examined in more detail in this section.
Philanthropic Groups: Philanthropic groups play a crucial role in supporting global health initiatives and have significant ties to organizations like the NIH, CDC, WHO, CEPI, and GAVI.
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation stands out as a major player, focusing on affecting health outcomes, addressing poverty, and modifying education globally through funding research, vaccine development, having spent billions to influence outcomes and enact agendas that have been quite profitable.
Rockefeller Foundation boasts a dark history in global health, collaborating with the WHO to address health challenges by influencing medical science and inhibiting innovation. They have been a big advocate in advancing universal health coverage.
The RAND Corporation provides evidence-based recommendations on global health issues, spanning healthcare quality, delivery, disease prevention, and public health preparedness. They have an outsized influence on global events.
Open Society Foundations advocate for health financing that serves marginalized populations, emphasizing effective global health funding allocation and utilization.
Clinton Foundation, spearheaded by former U.S. President Bill Clinton, addresses various global health challenges, including HIV/AIDS, malaria, and maternal and child health, through collaboration with governments, NGOs, and private sector entities to improve health outcomes worldwide. They remain one of the most opaque philanthropic groups.
These ‘philanthropic’ entities have vested interests in addressing global health issues, including potential future pandemics like Bird Flu, as it leads to massive financial gains, and is a component of a greater set of agendas.
Goverment (DoD, DARPA & BARDA):
DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) engages in vaccine-related research and development, contributing to preparedness for potential ‘pandemics’ like bird flu. While not directly creating vaccines, DARPA invests in programs such as ADEPT (Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics) and the Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3), aiming to respond swiftly to emerging pathogens and enhance limited pathogen immunity for military forces. Past initiatives like the Rapid Vaccine Assessment (RVA) program facilitated vaccine development through partnerships with biotechnology firms like VaxDesign, advancing artificial immune system technology.
BARDA (Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority), operating under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, assumes a pivotal role in vaccine development, particularly during public health emergencies like bird flu outbreaks. Collaborating with private entities, research institutions, and government agencies, BARDA accelerates vaccine development, manufacturing, and distribution. Noteworthy efforts include funding agreements with companies like CSL Seqirus and Sanofi (formerly: Protein Sciences) for avian flu vaccine candidates, ensuring preparedness for potential pandemics. BARDA also supports clinical studies assessing the safety and efficacy of adjuvants in combination with influenza virus vaccine candidates.
The Department of Defense (DoD) plays a multifaceted role in vaccine development, aligning with its national defense mission and broader public health objectives. Collaborating with various agencies and organizations, the DoD enhances preparedness against biological threats, including bird flu. While not directly involved in vaccine production, the DoD supports research, surveillance, and response efforts, focusing on military readiness and safeguarding service members from potential health risks posed by infectious diseases like bird flu. These entities' involvement underscores their significant financial interests and influence in dictating events, asserting control, and implementing agendas related to vaccine development and preparedness for biological threats.
RAND: Think tanks like the RAND Corporation wield considerable influence in pandemic response strategies, as evidenced by their involvement in both COVID-19 and potential bird flu scenarios. RAND actively tracks influenza trends and conducts tabletop exercises to simulate pandemic scenarios, offering toolkits for public health preparedness. Their studies reveal insights into the perceived risk of bird flu among poultry raisers and provide recommendations for prevention. Specifically, RAND's tabletop exercises for pandemic preparedness serve as ‘critical’ training tools for decision-making and coordination among stakeholders, ‘enhancing’ readiness for various scenarios like outbreak detection, vaccine distribution, travel restrictions, healthcare surge capacity, public communication, and resource allocation. While RAND's efforts are significant, other organizations like the WHO and CDC also contribute to bird flu preparedness through similar exercises and guidelines. This underscores the outsized role think tanks play in shaping pandemic response strategies and highlights the importance of comprehensive preparedness efforts in mitigating future health crises.
Government Influenza Reports:
The 2006 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the Department of Defense (DoD) Influenza Pandemic plan emphasized both the strengths and weaknesses of the DoD's preparedness efforts. While the report acknowledged that the DoD had taken important actions to prepare for an influenza pandemic, it also pointed out areas where improvements were needed.
One of the key strengths highlighted in the report was the DoD's recognition of the potential threat posed by an influenza pandemic and its proactive measures to address this threat. The DoD had developed a comprehensive plan to mitigate the impact of a pandemic, including measures to ensure the health and safety of military personnel, maintain essential services, and support civil authorities.
The U.S. government has worked on several reports and initiatives similar to the 2006 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the Department of Defense (DoD) Influenza Pandemic plan. Some of these include:
National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan: This plan was developed by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in collaboration with other federal agencies. It outlines the actions to be taken by various government agencies to prepare for and respond to an influenza pandemic.
The National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan provides a comprehensive framework for addressing various aspects of pandemic response, including vaccines, lockdowns, masking, and travel restrictions. In terms of vaccines, the plan underscores their critical role in pandemic preparedness and outlines strategies for their development, distribution, and administration. Collaboration among agencies, including the Department of Defense (DOD), ensures timely access to vaccines for essential personnel. While not explicitly using the term "lockdowns," the plan advocates for social distancing measures such as school closures, telecommuting, and limiting large gatherings to mitigate disease transmission. Additionally, the plan emphasizes the importance of personal protective equipment (PPE), including masks, particularly for healthcare workers, as a means to prevent respiratory virus transmission. Lastly, the plan acknowledges the necessity of implementing travel restrictions during a pandemic to help contain the spread of the disease.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Influenza Pandemic Preparedness and Response Framework: The CDC has developed frameworks and guidance documents to help states and localities prepare for and respond to influenza pandemics. These include guidance on surveillance, vaccine distribution, and community mitigation measures.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) plays a pivotal role in pandemic influenza preparedness and response, offering guidance and resources across various aspects. Regarding vaccines, the CDC underscores their significance and aims to ensure sufficient availability within four months of a pandemic declaration, with initial doses accessible within 12 weeks of such a declaration. In terms of lockdowns and social distancing, the CDC recommends a range of infection prevention strategies, including source control through masks, prompt isolation of suspected influenza cases, and the use of personal protective equipment for healthcare personnel. Addressing masking, the CDC provides interim guidance on its usage, particularly in healthcare settings for coughing patients and individuals suspected of having influenza. For non-healthcare settings, alternative strategies are suggested to curb influenza transmission within communities. While the CDC's framework does not explicitly outline travel restrictions, its approach focuses on risk assessment, decision-making, and action during different pandemic phases, suggesting that travel restrictions could be implemented as part of broader strategies to limit disease transmission.
Biennial Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Report: The HHS submits a biennial report to Congress on the nation's preparedness for an influenza pandemic. This report provides an overview of federal, state, and local efforts to prepare for and respond to a pandemic, including assessments of progress and areas for improvement.
Office of Inspector General (OIG) Reports: The OIG conducts audits and evaluations of government agencies' pandemic preparedness efforts. These reports often focus on specific aspects of pandemic planning and response, such as vaccine distribution or coordination between agencies.
The report on Laboratory Preparedness for Pandemic Influenza, issued on October 24, 2007, delves into the specific aspects of laboratory readiness concerning pandemic influenza. It offers valuable insights into the capacity of laboratories to effectively handle and diagnose cases of influenza amidst a pandemic scenario. For those seeking detailed information and analysis on this subject, the full report can be accessed through the provided link.
Department of Labor: the Department of Labor (DOL) has played a significant role in overseeing pandemic response efforts. Beginning in April 2020, the DOL has been actively engaged in pandemic response oversight activities. This involvement has yielded 21 published audit reports to date, accompanied by 57 recommendations aimed at mitigating programmatic vulnerabilities. For those interested in delving deeper into these ongoing initiatives, additional information can be found in the updated Pandemic Response Oversight Plan.
Government Accountability Office (GAO) Reports: In addition to the 2006 report on the DoD's pandemic plan, the GAO has published other reports on pandemic preparedness and response efforts across various government agencies. These reports assess the effectiveness of government programs and make recommendations for improvement.
The 2012 report titled "Influenza Pandemic: Agencies Report Progress in Plans to Protect Federal Workers but Oversight Could Be Improved" evaluated the advancements made by federal agencies in safeguarding their employees during an influenza pandemic. It highlighted several key findings: firstly, the majority of agencies had finalized influenza pandemic plans that outlined operational strategies to ensure employee protection. These plans often included policies such as telework and limitations on nonessential travel to minimize exposure risks. Moreover, many agencies had established protocols for distributing hygiene supplies. However, the report also identified areas requiring enhanced oversight, particularly in aspects like job classification based on exposure risk levels. For further details, the full report is available for reference here.
The Influenza Pandemic: Sustaining Focus on the Nation’s Planning and Preparedness Efforts report, issued by the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) in February 2009, highlights several key areas related to pandemic preparedness. Leadership, Authority, and Coordination are emphasized, stressing the need for clarified and tested roles and responsibilities during a pandemic, along with effective coordination mechanisms for a cohesive response. Efforts were also underway to improve surveillance and detection of pandemic-related threats in both humans and animals, although targeting assistance to countries at the greatest risk posed challenges due to incomplete information. It emphasizes the necessity for additional capacity to respond to and recover from an influenza pandemic, including procuring patient treatment space, acquiring and distributing medical supplies such as antivirals and vaccines, and ensuring infrastructure readiness. Finally, the report underscores the importance of strengthening monitoring and accountability mechanisms to ensure preparedness across all levels.
Summary: Various governmental reports and initiatives akin to the 2006 GAO report on the DoD's Influenza Pandemic plan demonstrate a collective effort towards pandemic preparedness and response. The National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan, developed collaboratively by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other federal agencies, outlines comprehensive actions encompassing vaccines, lockdowns, masking, and travel restrictions. However, while emphasizing critical measures such as vaccination and social distancing, the plan also underscores the ongoing need for coordination and capacity building to address potential gaps in pandemic response.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Influenza Pandemic Preparedness and Response Framework provides guidance on surveillance, vaccine distribution, and community mitigation measures, with a focus on infection control strategies and personal protective equipment usage. Similarly, the biennial Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Report by the HHS offers insights into federal, state, and local efforts, highlighting progress made and areas requiring further attention.
The comprehensive scope of these reports and initiatives reflects a concerted effort to push specific ‘pandemic’ related responses. The overlap of agencies pushing a common set of goals underscores the nature of the globalist system, and the captured aspect of top levels of government, as many past and continued recommendations have repeatedly been shown to not work but to be harmful to populations at large.
Vaccination:
Emphasis on the critical role of vaccination in pandemic preparedness.
Strategies outlined for vaccine development, distribution, and administration.
Collaboration among agencies to ensure timely access to vaccines for essential personnel.
Lockdowns and Social Distancing:
Advocacy for social distancing measures to mitigate disease transmission.
Measures such as school closures, telecommuting, and limiting large gatherings recommended.
Focus on infection prevention control strategies to reduce exposure risks.
Masking:
Recommendations for the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), including masks.
Guidance provided for healthcare settings and non-healthcare settings to prevent respiratory virus transmission.
Travel Restrictions:
Acknowledgment of the necessity of travel restrictions during a pandemic.
Integration of travel restrictions into broader strategies to limit disease spread.
Emphasis on risk assessment, decision-making, and action during different pandemic intervals.
Vaccines and Patents:
The landscape of Bird Flu vaccine development is evolving, marked by significant patents, collaborations, and recent advancements. A notable patent is US20180243402A1, which describes a novel bird flu vaccine combination incorporating virus-like particles (VLPs) and innovative adjuvants to enhance immunity against various strains. Similarly, the CDC has applied for a patent for a new H5N1 vaccine, leveraging genes from an Indonesian bird flu strain.
US5948410A: This patent is for a method of manufacturing an influenza vaccine. The method involves using a cell line to grow the influenza virus. This method is said to be more efficient than traditional methods of manufacturing influenza vaccines.
US20200338188A1: This patent refers to a method that uses foreign sequences, which are pieces of genetic information from birds with the flu. These sequences encode proteins that can trigger an immune response in birds. Specifically, they focus on proteins like hemagglutinin, nucleoprotein, matrix, or neuraminidase found in avian influenza.
In addition to patents, recent breakthroughs include The Pirbright Institute's development of a vaccine eliciting a swift immune response in chickens against H9N2 bird flu. Additionally, CureVac N.V. and GSK are collaborating on an investigational H5N1 pre-pandemic vaccine candidate undergoing clinical trials, illustrating the proactive approach of vaccine makers.
Start-ups like CureVac N.V. and academic institutions such as the University of Pittsburgh and the NIH are driving innovation in vaccine technologies. The involvement of key players like the CDC, NIH, and CEPI underscores the collective effort to bolster vaccine research and preparedness for potential bird flu outbreaks. CureVac N.V.'s mRNA-based H5N1 vaccine candidate, currently in Phase 1/2 clinical trials, represents advancement in infectious disease prevention, highlighting the importance these institutions place in mRNA technology in ‘pandemic’ preparedness efforts.
While advancements in Bird Flu vaccine development may bee seen as commendable on the surface, it's essential to recognize the profit motives underlying the efforts of these entities. The substantial investment of resources, including hundreds of millions of dollars and extensive research hours, suggests that these collaborations are driven by the anticipation of significant financial returns.
The notion that these groups are solely motivated by altruism is naive, particularly given their track record of prioritizing profits over public health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Past experiences have shown how pharmaceutical companies and other stakeholders have capitalized on health crises, often at the expense of broader societal well-being. Therefore, it's imperative to scrutinize the underlying motivations and ensure that the interests of the public are not overshadowed by profit-seeking agendas.
Control - US Law:
This article has already highlighted the profit motives of various entities involved in Bird Flu vaccine development, underscoring their financial interests in potential outbreaks. Moreover, the US government possesses emergency provisions, notably outlined in laws such as the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act), the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, and Section 319 of the PHS Act. These laws grant extensive powers to government agencies, enabling them to declare public health emergencies, provide federal assistance, and allocate resources to combat infectious disease outbreaks like Bird Flu.
Additionally, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) bestows the HHS Secretary with authority to issue declarations offering immunity from liability for entities involved in the development and distribution of countermeasures, such as vaccines and treatments, during public health emergencies. This combination of profit motives and government emergency powers suggests a complex interplay between financial interests and power dynamics, emphasizing the need for vigilance in ensuring public welfare amidst health crises.
Want to know more about the PREP Act, see below. I also highly recommend visiting
substack for more, specifically here, here, here, and here.PREP ACT:
42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(b)(1): I recommend, under the conditions stated in this Declaration, the manufacture, testing, development, distribution, administration, or use of the Covered Countermeasures.
IV. Liability Immunity
42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(a), 247d–6d(b)(1): Liability immunity as prescribed in the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act and conditions stated in this Declaration is in effect for the Recommended Activities described in Section III.
V. Covered Persons
42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(i)(2), (3), (4), (6), (8)(A) and (B): Covered Persons who are afforded liability immunity under this Declaration are manufacturers, distributors, program planners, “qualified persons,” and their officials, agents, and employees, as those terms are defined in the PREP Act, and the United States.
In addition, I have determined that the following additional persons are qualified persons: (a) Any person authorized in accordance with the public health and medical emergency response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction, as described in section VII below, to prescribe, administer, deliver, distribute or dispense the Covered Countermeasures, and their officials, agents, employees, contractors and volunteers, following a declaration of an emergency; (b) Any person authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense the Covered Countermeasures or who is otherwise authorized to perform an activity under an Emergency Use Authorization in accordance with section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act, and; (c) Any person authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense Covered Countermeasures in accordance with Section 564A of the FD&C Act.
VI. Covered Countermeasures
42 U.S.C. 247d–6b(c)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(i)(1) and (7): Covered Countermeasures are any antiviral, any other drug, any biological product, any diagnostic, any respiratory protective device, any other device, or any vaccine used against pandemic influenza A viruses and influenza A viruses with pandemic potential, all components and constituent materials of vaccines, and all devices and their constituent components used in the administration of vaccines, except that vaccines against influenza A and their associated components, constituent materials and devices covered under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program are not Covered Countermeasures.
Covered Countermeasures must be “qualified pandemic or epidemic products,” or “security countermeasures,” or drugs, biological products, or devices authorized for investigational or emergency use, as those terms are defined in the PREP Act, the FD&C Act, and the Public Health Service Act.
XI. Geographic Area
42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(a)(4), 247d–6d(b)(2)(D): Liability immunity is afforded for the administration or use of a Covered Countermeasure without geographic limitation.
Liability immunity is afforded to manufacturers and distributors without regard to whether the countermeasure is used by or administered in these geographic areas; liability immunity is afforded to program planners and qualified persons when the countermeasure is used by or administered in these geographic areas, or the program planner or qualified person reasonably could have believed the recipient was in these geographic areas.
XII. Effective Time Period
42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(b)(2)(B): For any Covered Countermeasure subsequently covered under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, liability immunity under this Declaration expires immediately upon such coverage.
Liability immunity for Covered Countermeasures obtained through means of distribution other than in accordance with the public health and medical response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction extends through December 31, 2027, or until a Covered Countermeasure is covered under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, as applicable, whichever occurs first.
Liability immunity for Covered Countermeasures administered and used in accordance with the public health and medical response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction begins with a Declaration and lasts through (1) the final day the emergency Declaration is in effect; (2) December 31, 2027; or (3) until a Covered Countermeasure is covered under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, as applicable, whichever occurs first.
XIII. Additional Time Period of Coverage
42 U.S.C. 247d–6d(b)(3)(B) and (C): I have determined that an additional twelve (12) months of liability protection is reasonable to allow for the manufacturer(s) to arrange for disposition of the Covered Countermeasure, including return of the Covered Countermeasures to the manufacturer, and for Covered Persons to take other appropriate actions to limit the administration or use of the Covered Countermeasures.
Covered Countermeasures obtained for the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) during the effective period of this Declaration for Covered Countermeasures obtained through means of distribution other than in accordance with the public health and medical response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction are covered through the date of administration or use pursuant to a distribution or release from the SNS.
Recent WHO Negotiations:
Below is a summary of recent events regarding the WHO Negotiations. For anyone unfamiliar with what the WHO is attempting, who the players are, and what their goals are, the best source I’ve found for this information is
.Summary: Discussions at the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) for the Pandemic Agreement were tense, particularly concerning the pathogen access and benefit-sharing (PABS) system. The Co-chair of the Bureau attempted to shut down proposals from the Africa Group on two occasions. However, the Africa Group argued that Article 12, focusing on the PABS system, is crucial and must be addressed before progress can be made. WHO's legal office presented a white paper discussing how various proposed instruments would interact, but it lacked clear solutions to prevent fragmentation of health emergency responses.
Some developed countries proposed changes that were opposed by developing countries, and the United States was seen as undermining key principles. Civil society organizations expressed concerns about the negotiation process and called for more balanced text-based negotiations. The article by Geneva Health Files highlighted disagreements between developed and developing countries on key principles such as benefit-sharing and surveillance. The proposed One Health instrument added complexity to the negotiations, with concerns about its implications and timing. Overall, the negotiations faced significant challenges and were at risk of producing a weak text due to time constraints and fundamental disagreements.
Past Posts:
This substack has assigned considerable time and resources to the topic of ‘pandemics’ to include past tabletop exercises and scenarios, financing, implemented laws, quarantine centers, the challenges of manipulating science and testing for future planned events, as well as predictive analysis for when another event may be attempted.
Post 67: explores of pandemic simulations versus real-world events reveals striking commonalities and overlapping trends across various scenarios. These simulations, including Clade X, Crimson Contagion, Catastrophic Contagion, Event 201, Operation Dark Winter, NTI Monkey Pox, and SPARS 2025, predictably forecasted emerging threats such as novel zoonotic viruses, airborne transmission concerns, viral mutations, government responses like lockdown strategies, challenges in vaccine rollout, and the need to manage misinformation.
Government responses exhibit similarities in employing lockdown strategies and addressing challenges in vaccine distribution, while misinformation management emerges as a recurrent theme. Furthermore, global fallout and cooperation considerations, strain on healthcare systems, and economic disruptions are all depicted in these simulations, mirroring real-world events with uncanny accuracy.
The alignment between meticulously planned exercises and actual crises raises suspicions about hidden agendas and undisclosed motives, prompting skeptics to question the orchestrated nature of these simulations.
Post 68: delves into predicting the next pandemic by analyzing various trends and indicators observed in the aftermath of Covid-19. Drawing from hindsight observations of Covid-19, including technological advancements, legal frameworks, infrastructure changes, and hospital staffing levels, the post highlights key aspects currently underway. These include the rollout of 5G towers, digital IDs, completed quarantine centers, enacted laws for emergency powers, and depleted PPE stores. Furthermore, the post emphasizes the importance of tracking financial transactions and observing tabletop exercises as key indicators of an impending pandemic event.
Despite the complexities and uncertainties, emerging trends suggest a potential timeline for the next pandemic, with late 2025/early 2026 appearing more likely. Anticipated events include targeting children, encephalitis as a primary symptom, mass censorship, targeted travel restrictions, quarantines, deliberately overwhelming hospitals, lockdowns, supply chain disruptions, and the potential for civil unrest. In conclusion, understanding globalist agendas, analyzing tabletop simulations, and closely monitoring evolving trends are crucial for predictive analyses of future global events, particularly in the context of potential pandemics.
Post 57: The discussion surrounding wastewater surveillance for future pandemics underscores a concerning trend: the potential manipulation of scientific data to justify expansive lockdowns. While sewage testing has been touted as a powerful tool for early disease detection, closer scrutiny reveals skepticism regarding its scientific reliability. Challenges in detection processes and doubts about the efficacy of advanced testing methods raise questions about the validity of wastewater surveillance.
Moreover, the entities funding sewage surveillance programs, including the NIH, CDC, European Commission, WHO, and the Gates Foundation, have played significant roles in shaping pandemic narratives and policies, raising suspicions about their interconnected agendas. The overlap between participants in pandemic simulation exercises like Event 201 and advocates for sewage surveillance further fuels concerns about hidden motives.
Examining patents related to sewage surveillance highlights a reliance on advanced analytical techniques, yet fails to provide clarity on their specificity and credibility. Companies like BioBot Analytics, involved in sewage sampling, face scrutiny over transparency, undisclosed patents, and potential connections between investors and government agencies.
The Environmental Surveillance Working Group (ESWG), claiming to monitor environmental conditions objectively, also faces scrutiny due to funding sources and potential biases in scientific methods. The normalization of sewage testing as a justification for imposing widespread restrictions, witnessed during the Covid-19 pandemic, raises alarms about its potential misuse in future health emergencies.
In navigating public health strategies, it is crucial to address skepticism surrounding sewage testing, demand transparency in research and funding, and critically evaluate the motives behind agencies spearheading these initiatives. This includes questioning their roles in controversial pandemic responses and ensuring scientific integrity guides decision-making processes.
Post 38: delves into the legal changes and emergency measures implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic, shedding light on the broad powers granted to governments under the guise of public health protection. Despite going largely unnoticed amid the chaos of the pandemic, numerous legal changes facilitated extreme governmental overreach and the construction of quarantine facilities. In the United States, federal isolation and quarantine powers are derived from the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) delegated the daily functions. States also possess police power functions to enforce isolation and quarantine measures within their borders. Emergency powers, while broad, rely on law enforcement personnel at state and local levels for enforcement.
Quarantine officers play a crucial role in enforcing authoritarian public health measures, including monitoring and surveillance, inspection and screening, issuing and enforcing quarantine orders, communicable disease control, collaboration with health authorities, data collection and reporting, education and communication, and emergency response. These officers wield significant power, akin to judges, and can classify individuals or buildings as public safety hazards, allowing for broad quarantine measures.
As the deadline for amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) approaches, citizens must be aware of the legal framework enabling authoritarian tools in future pandemics. The substantial investments in quarantine facilities and the passage of laws granting broader powers suggest a deliberate infrastructure for imprisonment, raising concerns about potential future use by those in power.
Recent Notes:
Predictions:
Speculating on predictive analysis for a future pandemic involves considering various factors, including lessons learned from Covid-19, recommendations from organizations like RAND Corp, globalist agendas, WHO initiatives, open-source white papers, and even conspiracy theories. Based on these inputs, here's a speculative scenario:
Predictive Analysis:
Early Detection: Enhanced surveillance systems, including expanded wastewater surveillance, would likely be employed to detect the emergence of new pathogens.
Global Cooperation: International collaboration would likely be emphasized to track and contain outbreaks across borders.
Technological Solutions: Digital IDs tied to vaccine passports would likely be widely adopted to ‘facilitate’ travel and access to public spaces. Mass tracking, testing, and surveillance would likely be utilized to monitor and control the spread of the virus.
Censorship: There would likely be increased censorship to manage misinformation and control the narrative surrounding the pandemic.
Economic Impact: There’s a greater than roughly even chance that tockdowns and restrictions would lead to disruptions in supply chains, resulting in shortages of essential goods, including food supplies. Reductions in meat, dairy, and egg production may occur due to workforce shortages and logistical challenges.
Healthcare Strain: Healthcare systems would likely be overwhelmed, leading to shortages of medical supplies and personnel.
Social Unrest: Restrictions on movement and personal freedoms could lead to civil unrest and protests against government mandates.
Education Revolution: Traditional schooling collapses. Online learning dominates.
Main Players Involved:
Government Agencies: National and international health agencies would very likely lead the response efforts, implementing policies and regulations to combat the ‘pandemic.’
Tech Companies: Tech giants would likely play a significant role in developing and deploying digital solutions for tracking, testing, and surveillance.
Pharmaceutical Companies: Vaccine manufacturers would very likely be at the forefront of vaccine development and distribution.
Media Outlets: Mainstream media would likely be instrumental in disseminating information and shaping public perception of the pandemic. So too would alternative outlets and social media.
Global Organizations: WHO, UN, and other global organizations would likely coordinate response efforts and provide guidance to member states.
Outcomes:
Economic Disruption: There is a greater than roughly even chance that a future ‘pandemic’ would lead to significant economic disruptions, including recession, job losses, and financial instability.
Food Supply Chain Disruptions: Shortages of essential goods, including food, could lead to price increases and food insecurity.
Healthcare Challenges: It would likely be reported that healthcare systems would struggle to cope with the influx of patients, resulting in reduced quality of care and increased mortality rates.
Social Impact: Restrictions on movement and social interactions would have profound effects on mental health and social cohesion, potentially leading to long-term societal changes.
In summary, a future pandemic scenario could involve widespread use of digital technologies, increased surveillance and censorship, economic disruptions, and challenges in healthcare and food supply chains. Effective response would require coordinated efforts from governments, international organizations, and private sector stakeholders, while also ensuring transparency, accountability, and respect for individual rights and freedoms.
Conclusions:
In recent years, the discourse surrounding avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu, has surged to the forefront of public attention, prompting the global community to confront the looming threat posed by those attempting to sell a narrative of a novel infectious disease. From the culling of tens of millions of birds to the allocation of substantial funds towards vaccine research, the urgency to contain and mitigate the spread of avian flu has never been more pronounced. However, amidst these efforts lies a shadowy narrative that captivates those inclined towards conspiracy theories, prompting skepticism about the true intentions driving governmental responses.
The convergence of these events prompts a broader inquiry into the future of pandemics and the world's response to them. Questions about when the next pandemic will strike, the likely response, and the motives behind these actions demand deeper exploration into the complex interplay of motives, funding streams, and political agendas that shape our understanding of forced global health crises.
Examining the official origins and narrative surrounding avian influenza reveals a long history of scientific study and surveillance, but it also unveils a darker history of globalist players, conspiracies and coverups.
Recent mutations in bird flu strains, coupled with their unprecedented ability to infect a broad range of animal species, raise questions about the evolutionary mechanisms at play. The breadth of hosts infected by bird flu, including domestic and wild animals, suggests either remarkable adaptability of the virus or a purposefully crafted narrative for profit-driven agendas.
The fallacy in testing, particularly PCR testing, raises concerns about the accuracy of diagnostic methods used during pandemics. PCR testing's reliance on cycle threshold values, coupled with the withholding of critical information from medical professionals, has led to questions about the accuracy of test results and the potential misclassification of individuals. Moreover, the lack of transparency in testing protocols raises ethical concerns about the necessity and proportionality of mass culling measures based solely on PCR results.
Financial backers and drivers of pandemic responses, including philanthropic groups, government agencies, and think tanks, have significant financial interests in addressing global health issues. The involvement of these entities in vaccine development, surveillance, and response efforts underscores the profit motives driving pandemic preparedness initiatives.
Furthermore, US laws such as the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) grant extensive powers to government agencies, enabling them to declare public health emergencies and provide immunity from liability for entities involved in the development and distribution of countermeasures. This combination of profit motives and government emergency powers suggests a complex interplay between financial interests and power dynamics, emphasizing the need for vigilance in ensuring public welfare amidst health crises.
The number of Influenza Pandemic papers, tabletop exercises, vaccine funding, research, and development, coupled with the governmental powers that would be granted during an emergency, specifically under the PREP Act, as well as the sheer number of predictive programming elements that references Bird Flu or Influenza Pandemics, indicate that a future planned event may very well be Influenza based. It is also possible that Avian Influenza will simply be used as an excuse to destroy food supples, namely cattle, pigs, dairy, poultry, and egg supplies - as well as being used to maintain a fear narrative so populations don’t "forget” to be scared.
In conclusion, the narrative surrounding avian influenza and pandemic preparedness raises significant questions about the motives, funding, and agendas driving global health initiatives. The convergence of profit-driven interests, government emergency powers, and opaque testing protocols underscores the need for transparency, accountability, and critical evaluation of pandemic response strategies. As the world grapples with the threat of future pandemics, it is imperative to remain vigilant and scrutinize the actions of those shaping our understanding and response to global health crises.
In regard to when this may occur, my prior assessment of 2025/2026 still stands. That being stated, this needn’t occur at all. A collective revelation, awakening of our true selves, our collective power, and our ability to manifest a better future are still very much within our grasp.
REFERENCES & FURTHER READING:
News Articles:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenmcbride1/2021/03/22/bill-gates-wants-rich-countries-to-move-to-100-synthetic-beef-but-heres-the-opportunity-behind-this-trend/?sh=49bb8e216899
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/vaccine-makers-prep-bird-flu-shot-humans-just-case-rich-nations-lock-supplies-2023-03-20/
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-gates-called-universal-flu-151302196.html
https://www.axios.com/2024/05/04/bird-flu-wildlife-mammals
https://www.axios.com/2024/05/03/bird-flu-humans-risk-cattle
https://www.the-express.com/news/health/136462/texas-dairy-farm-worker-first-photo-bleeding-eyeballs
https://americafirstreport.com/beyond-impossible-the-truth-behind-the-fake-meat-industry/
https://winepressnews.com/2024/04/29/usda-announces-they-will-begin-testing-ground-beef-samples-for-bird-flu-with-pcr-test-colombia-bans-imports/
https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-04-07-government-diagnosing-chickens-bird-flu-pcr-slaughter.html
https://principia-scientific.com/who-admits-high-cycle-pcr-tests-produce-covid-false-positives/
https://tamhunt.medium.com/the-false-positive-catastrophe-that-results-from-widespread-covid-19-testing-fc6febac8689
https://en.reseauinternational.net/les-tests-pcr-faux-positifs-sont-extremement-nombreux-malgre-lavis-de-lafp/
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.26.20080911v1.full
https://dailysceptic.org/2020/11/30/the-pcr-false-positive-pseudo-epidemic/
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/two-possible-bird-flu-vaccines-available-weeks-needed-rcna149961
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/05/health/bird-flu-vaccines-treatments.html
https://www.kpbs.org/news/health/2024/05/03/launching-an-effective-bird-flu-vaccine-quickly-could-be-tough-scientists-warn
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/05/03/1248092856/bird-avian-flu-vaccine-human-pandemic
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/248405/gene-edited-chickens-show-promise-fight-against/
https://www.anl.gov/article/newly-described-dragon-protein-could-be-key-to-bird-flu-cure
https://www.science.org/content/article/proof-concept-crispr-engineered-chickens-shrug-flu
https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/were-machine-csl-seqirus-scores-301-million-barda-contract-test-avian-influenza-vaccine
Background:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/timeline/avian-timeline-background.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/communication-resources/bird-flu-origin-infographic.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/timeline/avian-timeline-references.htm
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-63464065
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/2015/fsc_hpai_hunters.pdf
Mercola:
https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-04-19-bird-flu-cant-kill-humans-unless-weaponized.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola
https://www.overdrive.com/media/604266/the-great-bird-flu-hoax
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Great_Bird_Flu_Hoax.html?id=YVchyXwUqgQC
https://www.amazon.com/Great-Bird-Flu-Hoax-Pandemic/dp/0785297332
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bird-flu-outbreak-2022-conspiracy-theories/
Zoonotic Spillover:
https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/11/e012026
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.12.439332v1.full.pdf
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301195
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9400-2538
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8077-330X
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012026
https://github.com/concentricbyginkgo/zoonotic_spillover_trend
Testing and PCR:
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj-2021-066871
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0281153
https://www.rcpjournals.org/content/clinmedicine/21/1/e54
https://childrenshealthdefense.eu/eu-affairs/making-something-out-of-nothing-pcr-tests-ct-values-and-false-positives-a-comment-on-the-efficacy-of-the-rt-pcr-test-in-view-of-the-jaafar-paper/
https://elifesciences.org/articles/64683
https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/11/6/1091
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-066871
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268187
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1491/5912603?login=false
Bird Flu Vaccines:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20180243402A1/en
https://grain.org/en/article/2243-us-government-lays-patent-claim-on-bird-flu-virus
https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/2024/04/24/mrna-bird-flu-vaccine-candidate-launches-study-us
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/bird-flu-vaccine-human-1.6784487
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/vaccine-makers-are-preparing-for-bird-flu/
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/candidate-vaccine-virus.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/2020-2021/partners-promote-vaccine-equity.htm
https://pbn.com/epivax-joins-nihs-5-8m-h7n9-bird-flu-vaccine-project/
https://www.immunize.org/about/partnerships/funding/
https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/2024/04/24/mrna-bird-flu-vaccine-candidate-launches-study-us
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/09/230929171019.htm
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bird-flu-outbreak-vaccine-testing-poultry-vaccinations/
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01760-0
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-09-pandemic-method-tackling-bird-flu.html
Philanthropic Groups:
https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/global-health-program-overview.pdf
https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/the-rockefeller-foundation-partners-in-global-health/
https://www.rand.org/topics/global-health.html
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/topics/health-financing
https://www.rand.org/health-care.html
https://www.voa.va.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DocumentID=3513
https://billgatefoundation.org/Who-We-Are/General-Information/Leadership/Global-Health.html
https://www.who.int/about/funding/contributors/the-rockefeller-foundation
https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/authors/cepi
https://www.unicef.org/media/65841/file
Government:
https://www.defensedaily.com/highnam-darpa-work-aided-covid-19-vaccine-development/pentagon/
https://www.fiercepharma.com/vaccines/protein-sciences-develops-h7n9-vaccines-under-barda-contract
https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/newsroom/2022/influenzavaccines/
https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2021-08-27
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12013
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/planning-preparedness/national-strategy-planning.html
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/comm-secy/2006/2006-0033comscy.pdf
https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/bitstreams/abe44cc8-d5b4-4abf-9f34-30b846003803/download
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/homeland/pandemic-influenza-implementation.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/pdf/pandemic-influenza-implementation.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/national-strategy/planning-guidance/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/infectioncontrol/maskguidance.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/national-strategy/intervals-framework.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/planning-preparedness/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/national-strategy/index.html
https://emergency.cdc.gov/planning/
https://oig.hhs.gov/reports-and-publications/all-reports-and-publications/laboratory-preparedness-for-pandemic-influenza/
https://www.oig.dol.gov/public/oaprojects/Updated%20Pandemic%20Response%20Oversight%20Plan%202022%20for%20Publication.pdf
https://oig.justice.gov/coronavirus
https://oig.hhs.gov/reports-and-publications/
RAND:
https://www.rand.org/topics/influenza.html
https://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP67056.html
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/204728/B0381.pdf?sequence=1
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2006/RAND_TR319.pdf
https://www.adph.org/CEP/assets/12HarvardPHTabletops.pdf
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hcphp/%29
Vaccines:
https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/2024/04/24/mrna-bird-flu-vaccine-candidate-launches-study-us
https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/2024/04/24/mrna-bird-flu-vaccine-candidate-launches-study-us
https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/curevac-h5n1-avian-study/
https://www.thepoultrysite.com/news/2021/07/new-cost-effective-bird-flu-vaccine-from-pirbright-institute-shows-promising-results
https://www.pirbright.ac.uk/news/2021/07/pirbright%E2%80%99s-new-bird-flu-vaccine-provides-rapid-protection-could-reduce-virus-spread
US Laws:
https://aspr.hhs.gov/legal/PHE/Pages/default.aspx
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/23/2022-28014/notice-of-amendment
https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/pandemic-biohazard/cdc-director-robert-redfield-says-pandemic-flu-is-very-possible/
https://www.sott.net/article/434959-Did-psychopath-Rockefeller-create-the-Spanish-Flu-pandemic-of-1918
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/03/no_author/did-a-vaccine-experiment-on-u-s-soldiers-cause-the-spanish-flu/
https://robscholtemuseum.nl/russ-winter-the-truth-revealed-about-the-deadly-1918-spanish-flu-it-was-actually-bacterial-pneumonia/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2126288/pdf/449.pdf
https://en.reseauinternational.net/linstitut-rockefeller-et-la-grippe-espagnole-de-1918/
https://expose-news.com/2024/04/17/will-a-false-bird-flu-pandemic-be-the-end-of/
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/Public/2024/May/PDF/fake-meat-industry-pdf.pdf
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2024/05/04/fake-meat-industry.aspx
https://drjudyamikovits.com/
https://rumble.com/c/TheRealDrJudy
https://totalityofevidence.com/dr-judy-mikovits/
https://thetruthaboutvaccines.com/judy-mikovits-interview/
https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/winter-2019/intolerable-genius-berkeleys-most-controversial-nobel-laureate
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/08/12/unconventional-nobel-laureate-kary-mullis-known-for-revolutionizing-dna-research-has-died/
https://www.garydbarnett.com/murderous-anthony-faucis-nemesis-died-under-mysterious-circumstances/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/kary-mullis-death-nobel-laureate-prize-chemistry-dna-research-university-california-berkeley-a9055436.html